fostering creativity: a multiple intelligences approach to designing learning in undergraduate fine...

113

Abstract

iJADE 31.2 (2012)© 2012 The Authors. iJADE © 2012 NSEAD/Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Fostering Creativity: A Multiple Intelligences Approach to Designing Learning in Undergraduate Fine ArtAngela Clarke and Peter Cripps

Curriculum and pedagogy in undergraduate fine art can promote an approach to learning creativ-ity that is more about being an artist than know-ing about art. Lecturers can provide a road map for developing particular dispositions, in relation to student ideas and perceptions, to foster personalised creativity. This requires that lectur-ers have an ability to harness the range of learn-ing approaches and interests that students bring to their studio learning environments. One way of doing this is to construct learning activi-ties in ways that engage students’ multiple intel-ligences so they may acquire deeper under-standings of their own creative processes. Fostering this kind of creative think tank is artistry of an educational kind. In this article we explore such a creative think tank by examining a particular lecturer’s pedagogical approach. We discuss how and why this lecturer designs activities in a way that draws on multiple intelli-gences to stimulate learning and foster creativ-ity. Using narratives, we analyse this particular curriculum through the lens of multiple intelli-

gence theory and explore how the pedagogical approach develops the whole person. We found that by attending to relationships and focusing on a plurality of intellect this particular curricu-lum and pedagogy promotes transformative learning in students studying fine art.

Keywordscreativity, fine art, multiple intelligences, tertiary learning and teaching


114

Angela Clarke and Peter Cripps

Fostering creativityElliot Eisner (2002, 215) calls for research in Arts education that focuses on questions such as ‘What do teachers of the arts do when they teach and what are its consequences?’ In seek-ing to answer his questions we have explored how a particular Fine Art lecturer attempts to foster creativity in his higher education students.

For the purposes of this discussion we define creativity as a transformative process of know-ing, thinking and doing that embodies elements such as risk taking, envisaging, engaging, persisting, observing, experimenting, attending to relationships, taking a benign attitude to error and critically reflecting. Although definitions of creativity are divergent, these elements seem to gain general acceptance in the literature on creativity (see, for example, Clarke & Budge 2010; Eisner 2002; Gardner 2007; Hetland et al. 2007) and have been useful for exploring the particular pedagogical approach discussed in this article. So, can these elements of creativity be taught and learnt in fine art contexts? If so, how are they being taught and learnt?

Some argue that the curriculum and peda-gogy in undergraduate fine art fosters an approach to learning creativity that is more about being an artist than knowing about art. Shreeve et al. (2010, 125) refer to the educational process in art and design as ‘a kind of exchange’ which they believe expresses the dialogic nature of teaching in these disciplinary domains. Lecturers present as ‘co-learners’ and provide a road map for understanding the student’s indi-vidual perceptions of the world in order to foster their highly personalised creativity. A large component of the curriculum content could therefore arguably be said to come as much from students as from lecturers. Hetland et al. (2007, 5), articulate this in more detail stating that in addition to the two basic arenas of learn-ing, that is, the craft of the visual arts and the art world beyond the classroom, a hidden curricu-lum exists that comprises of at least six other domains of cognitive and attitudinal develop-ment that foster ‘studio habits of mind’. These studio habits of mind develop personalised approaches to learning that include engaging

and persisting, envisioning, expressing, observ-ing, stretching and exploring, and reflecting in a way that develops the whole self. The role of a fine art lecturer therefore is to link creative responses, studio habits of mind and skills to the act of being an artist and developing an iden-tity as a practitioner. This requires that lecturers have an ability to harness the range of learning approaches and interests that students bring to their studio learning environments.

From a theoretical perspective, this approach can be supported by Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences which takes account of the whole of human intelligence. Gardner (1983, 1993) contends that human beings have multi-ple intelligences, which in his original work comprise linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, musical, bodily-kinaesthetic, interper-sonal and intrapersonal. Gardner freely admits that this is a preliminary list and in more recent times has added others, but essentially he makes a case for the ‘plurality of intellect’ (Gard-ner 1993, 9).

Gardner (2007) argues that if educators apply multiple intelligence theory to the design of their learning environments, the ability to engage students, dissolve misconceptions and build firmer and more flexible understandings is increased. This approach to learning and teach-ing, in Gardner’s (2007) view, increases the moti-vation of students and their ability to engage in transformative learning. Transformative learning is the academic ideal because it fosters an abil-ity to change beliefs, attitudes and emotional reactions. Mezirow (1975) noticed that when adults become critically aware of their assump-tions and reflect on their experiences in a critical way, they begin to perceive how and why those assumptions constrain their levels of under-standing and their ability to make meaning of things. When the climate is right, motivation for learning continues because the accumulation of new knowledge, methods and perspectives leads to a life-long passion for learning about being oneself in the world.

Dall’Alba & Barnacle (2007) argue that a shift in focus from knowledge transfer or acquisition to learning ways of being can be described as an

115



ontological rather than an epistemological approach to learning. They call for ‘educational approaches that engage the whole person: what they know, how they act, and who they are’ (Dall’Alba & Barnacle 2009, 689). We have found this way of thinking very useful, and in this article set out to explore an approach to curriculum and pedagogy, in a particular fine art context, that does indeed engage the whole person and is more about being an artist than knowing about art. The emphasis on being rather than knowing requires that lecturers understand the complex-ities of how humans learn. One way of doing this is to construct learning activities that engage students’ multiple intelligences so they may acquire deeper understandings of their own creative processes. This article therefore uses Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence theory as a lens through which we can examine curriculum and its effectiveness in learning creativity. Using narratives, we explore a particular lecturer’s pedagogical approach and discuss how it promotes transformative learning. Approach to researchThis in-depth qualitative study privileges the voice of an experienced sculpture lecturer to find out how a particular pedagogical approach in undergraduate fine art fosters creativity. This particular lecturer was chosen because of his interest in curriculum and pedagogy, evidenced through his tertiary teaching qualifications, high course experience survey results and willing-ness to engage in reflective practice about teaching and learning processes.

The methodological approach of this project is influenced by the narrative work of Connelly & Clandinin (1990). We acknowledge that as authors we are living and experiencing our stories in an ongoing way as well as reflecting upon them in order to explain ourselves to others through storytelling (Connelly & Clandinin 1990). The research project was not designed with a learning intervention in mind, the purpose of the research was to discover what was already happening in a fine art learning context. This article therefore attempts to capture moments in time in order to present the world

from the perspective of the participants in a way that promotes an empathic understanding of this world (Barone & Eisner 1997). It provides images, narratives and reflections that explore the following research question:

How does a particular lecturer promote a learn-ing environment where students can develop their conceptual and technical skills in order to generate works of art?

Within this framework we have bounded the study by applying the principles of a case study. However, we adopt Stake’s (2000) view that a case study is a choice to study one thing in particular rather than a methodological choice. A case study gives us the opportunity to view the phenomenon within its total environment, study many different aspects of that phenome-non and reflect upon how those aspects relate to each other. The individual case can then be used to generate change by showcasing an idea that others would ordinarily not accept (Gummesson 1991). For the purposes of this article we have examined this particular case through the lens of Gardner’s Multiple Intelli-gence theory. This analysis was used as a mode of interpretation after the events took place.

This article is the outcome of a two-year collaborative research project between the authors. The project took place in a school of art sculpture class in a large, urban Australian University. The sculpture class was a first year core subject called ‘Body and Space’ offered within a Bachelor of Arts (Fine Art) degree that ran for 12 weeks. Participants have agreed to disclose their identities through narratives and photographs of their work for the purposes of this study. Our decision to disclose participant identities is our way of recognising and valuing the highly personalised and life-long human experience of learning. We are guided by ethical principles that prevent harming or wronging others, encourage respect and promote the abil-ity to be fair (Sieber 1993).

Our research narrative captures, through storytelling, the experiences of Peter Cripps, a practising artist and senior sculpture lecturer,

116



and four of his sculpture students, Hannah Wall, Anna Steele, Richard Collins and Felix Davis, when they are engaged in fine art pedagogies. The research narrative also includes a pedagog-ical analysis by the first author, Angela Clarke, an educational researcher, in collaboration with Peter Cripps, her co-author.

From this point forward, participants will be referred to by first name only. Our intention is not to engage in educational criticism, but rather to engage in what Eisner (2002) refers to as good educational critique that promotes artistry in teaching. We have endeavoured to identify what Peter is doing in order to collaboratively imagine ‘how it might be made even better’ (Eisner 2002, 49).

Semi-structured individual interviews with students were conducted only by Angela to avoid any issues of students being in a depend-ent relationship with Peter, their lecturer. The interview questions were about the student experiences within the single sculpture subject called ‘Body and Space’. Students were not approached for an interview until all grading and assessment for the subject in question was completed. The semi-structured interviews allowed for in-depth stories to emerge (Fontana & Frey 2005) about their learning experiences, but did not focus on Gardner’s Multiple Intelli-gence theory. Their stories are presented in the form of a narrative in this article. Interviews with students were voluntary and went on for approx-imately one hour. A series of unstructured inter-views between Peter and Angela were held during 2006 and 2007 which, together with teaching observations and analysis of teaching materials, generated field notes and a research journal which were analysed after the events through the lens of Gardner’s (1983, 1993) Multi-ple Intelligence theory to identify patterns and causal relationships and then developed into the narrative presented in this article.

The narrative is steeped in the belief that human lives are storied and that people tell stories of their experiences in order to make meaning of their lives (Connelly & Clandinin 1990). The following sections describe how Peter designs learning in a way that draws on

particular intelligences to stimulate learning and foster creativity. In order to keep the narrative fluid we have at times interwoven quotations from the participant interview transcripts into the main text.

Research narrativeGardner (2007) argues that utilizing multiple intelligences in both teaching and learning processes provides educators with the neces-sary tools to build learning environments that have powerful entry points into the subject matter to be learnt, offer apt analogies and have multiple representations of core ideas of the particular material to be learnt.

A core concept that artists must come to understand is the nature of space. The learning outcomes in Peter’s subject ‘Body and Space’ are particularly focused on space and its rela-tionship to the body. Peter aims to provide direct experiences of spatiality and devises projects that have a range of entry points and experi-ences that help students gain a deep under-standing of positive and negative space in multi-ple ways. It should be noted that Peter’s curriculum design has developed over many years and was not specifically devised with Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence theory in mind. Although the learning activities are discussed in this article as discrete modes, this is an analyti-cal exercise which in no way reflects the inte-grated design of the lived curriculum. The following exploration of Peter’s curriculum using Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence theory emerged out of the research interviews and is simply one way of making meaning of the events that were experienced by the Peter and his students and witnessed by Angela.

Designing learning using spatial and bodily-kinaesthetic intelligencesIn Peter’s Body Extensions project, students are asked to focus on objective and subjective space by making negative space visible. They are asked to use an object in relation to their own bodies so that the outcome can only be seen with them in it. Whatever they create then becomes resistant to being looked at objec-

117



This page:

Figure 1 Anna’s body extensions project. Reproduced with the artist’s permission

Figure 2 Boxed clay project

Figure 3 Boxed clay project outcome. Repro-duced with the artist’s permission

tively. It was the highlight of the subject for Anna who used some slinkies attached to parts of her body and then moved around the space to make the negative space around her body visible, as seen in Figure 1.

This activity uses both spatial and bodily-kinaesthetic intelligences and the outcome is performative in nature. Gardner (2004, 34) describes spatial intelligence as ‘the capacity to form spatial representations or images in one’s mind, and to operate upon them variously’, and describes bodily-kinaesthetic intelligence as ‘the capacity to solve problems or to create products using your whole body, or parts of your body, like your hand or your mouth’ (2004, 35). The activity is an integrated experience that stimulates learning through direct physical experience. In so doing, it also fosters elements of creativity such as risk taking, experimentation and envisaging, often leading to powerfully transformative moments for students. For example, it helped Hannah to make a concep-tual shift in her thinking about positive and nega-tive space:

You have to focus not just on the artwork but what’s around it, for example if you are putting an artwork on a table, the table becomes part of the artwork which I hadn’t really thought about before I came to uni. (Hannah, interview tran-script, 13 September 2007)

Other projects encourage students to experi-ment with new ways of working with materials as a way of understanding space. For example, Peter’s Boxed Clay Modeling project involves removing the sight sense from the making process. Students have a piece of clay inside a covered cardboard box. The box has two holes that allow the students to place their hands inside, as seen in Figure 2.

Students are asked to sculpt a clay model using only their hands. They observe a life model with their eyes but cannot use their eyes to help construct the sculpture. The outcome of the process can be seen in Figure 3.

This kind of project stimulates learning by taking the pressure off the outcome and privi-leging the alternative sensory experience of

118



using one’s hands to see and measure spatial relationships. In this way it develops elements of creativity such as observing, experimenting and taking a benign attitude to error, as evidenced by Hannah who found this activity ‘relaxing or meditative because you’re not worrying about what it’s going to look like in the end’ (Hannah, interview transcript, 13 Septem-ber 2007).

Designing learning using logical-mathematical intelligenceGardner (2007) refers to logical-mathematical intelligence as the ability to sequence things and work with numbers. Peter deliberately utilises this intelligence in his Plaster Cast Nega-tive/Positive Space project to provide an oppor-tunity for students to find alternative ways to conceptualise space. In this project students are asked to make a positive object based on a life model by halving the dimensions. They are then asked to choose another point in the room and to make a second positive object again halving the dimensions. These two objects are then joined together by casting the negative space in between the two objects as positive space, see Figure 4.

This kind of project initiates learning through the logical mind and is then supported by a kinaesthetic making process. Anna’s comments below demonstrate how this project stimulated learning and led to a deep conceptual under-standing of space:

When someone pointed out ‘we’re just connect-ing two objects together’ … it made me think on an intellectual level that it was all just one thing. That every object is made up of components that are things that you’ve got, things that are space and things that aren’t space and they fit together. (Anna, interview transcript, 6 September 2007)

Anna’s comments are also evidence of the fact that elements of creativity such as observing, persisting and attending to relationships are being activated and developed.

Designing learning using linguistic intelligenceIn simple terms, Gardner (2007, 31) defines linguistic intelligence as the ability to use spoken and written language. Every discipline has its peculiarities of language and Peter is keen for his students to develop an artistic vocabulary that helps them participate in the ongoing discourse of artistic practice. Hannah under-stands that the practical exercises were not only about experiencing the creative process but they were opportunities for developing an artis-tic vocabulary. As she notes, ‘you’re learning the actual words like morphism … and those sorts of art terms as well’ (Hannah, interview tran-script, 13 September 2007).

Richard found that Peter’s subject provided him with an opportunity to challenge some of his ‘prejudices about the discourse of art which places great store in the idea of narrative; that everything is seen in terms of a narrative’. He found that he was ‘resistant to some of the language used to describe the subject and the subject content’. He became aware that he was constantly fighting the urge to ‘shift into my own way of approaching things … in terms of form … whereas Peter was always leading us towards trying to describe what we were seeing’. He

119



Opposite page:

Figure 4 Plaster cast negative/positive space project. The negative space between two objects is made positive. Reproduced with the artist’s permission

This page:

Figure 5 Research journal showing evidence of the experimental process. Repro-duced with the artist’s permission

noted that Peter would use ‘narrative as a central metaphor for the work’ which at first tended to make Richard’s ‘hackles rise’ (Richard, interview transcript, 11 September 2007).

The fact that students had such strong and insightful reactions to the development of an artistic language is evidence that learning has been stimulated. Their linguistic perceptions were challenged, which led them to question their assumptions at a deeper level and move toward some sort of transformation. This also fosters elements of creativity such as critical reflection and envisioning by providing opportu-nities for students to envision the world anew.

Fostering intrapersonal intelligenceThe ability to take one’s attention inward is criti-cal to the life of an artist if they are to develop their unique creative processes. Gardner (2007, 39) defines intrapersonal intelligence as the abil-ity to direct one’s attention inward and ‘identify personal feelings, goals, fears, strengths, and weaknesses’ and use that information to make judicious decisions in life. Peter encourages students to keep support material throughout the four years of study. In particular, a research journal is kept such as the one shown in Figure 5.

The journal varies … but it can have the sense of how one feels and how one approaches things but also it’s a reflection on the making cycle. The purpose is often about them understanding that what they are doing is work. The biggest dilemma for many artists is that they don’t value what they make. They don’t value the time they spend in the studio as being work. (Peter, inter-view transcript, 30 October 2007)

Learning to understand oneself and the world around can be extremely challenging. Providing students with strategies to understand them-selves and their art making processes is funda-mental to fostering elements of creativity such as risk taking, engaging, taking a benign attitude to error and critical reflection.

Fostering interpersonal intelligenceGardner (2007, 39) defines interpersonal intelli-gence as the ability to ‘discriminate among persons, figure out their motivations, work effectively with them, and, if necessary, manip-ulate them’. Fostering creativity is about attend-ing to relationships on both an aesthetic and relational level. Students are actively encour-aged to collaboratively engage in making

120



processes, critique and critical reflection as they generate their works of art. Peter believes that the collaborative learning approach magnifies the learning possibilities and takes account of the creative life that exists before and after art school. There is a conscious awareness that the bonds that are formed in first year will continue throughout academic life and post art school. For this reason Peter actively establishes bonds of trust amongst the group from very early on, to promote a collegial atmosphere throughout their degree. Small teacher-directed collabora-tive learning activities are designed to build confidence and freedom of expression in a way that is uncompetitive. This is the academic ideal in terms of student motivation, transition and retention (Biggs & Tang 2007; Gardner 2007).

If you take the pressure off they are much more relaxed as individuals, but if you try to just get them to develop their own ideas or response, we find within a few weeks we are starting to lose students they are starting to stay away and they are suffering from performance anxiety. (Peter, interview transcript, 30 October 2007)

Collaborative learning is an ideal educational process because it has inquiry at its core and provides students with opportunities to collabo-ratively construct knowledge through social interaction which shapes and tests meaning

and deepens understanding (Garrison & Vaughan 2008). Peter explains that students get to know each other socially, which means ‘incredible interactions occur’. This is an impor-tant teaching tool that breaks down a competi-tive individualistic approach to working. The emphasis is deliberately taken off individual work in these early stages to build the students’ confidence. Peter’s Welded Sheet Metal project is an example of this. The task, in this project, is to build a life-size sculpture of a human body in sheet metal. It is a whole-class collaborative project. First, students are asked to work in small groups on one body part only. For exam-ple, one group works on the right arm, another group on the head and so on, as seen in Figure 6.

It is made clear to students that they are to interact and collaborate with the model in a respectful way as the task involves them touch-ing the life model’s body directly. Peter chooses particular life models who understand the learn-ing process from the students’ point of view and are willing to work collaboratively with the students in this way. Second, students are asked to work as a whole group to piece the body together to create a single sculptural outcome, as seen in Figure 7.

Anna was convinced that the dialogue that occurred between her and other students during collaborative work was the thing that most enhanced her learning in this subject:

121



Opposite page:

Figure 6 Welded sheet metal project – detail of working in small groups with life model

This page:

Figure 7 Welded sheet metal project – collabora-tive learning

The moment where things actually clicked for me was actually talking with other colleagues in the class … and saying ‘what the hell’s going on here?’ Just kind of nutting it out together, … that really helped. (Anna, interview transcript, 6 September 2007)

Richard could also see the benefits of collabora-tive work but found the process ‘extremely chal-lenging’. He reveals that the first group of three he was with ‘just didn’t get on at all’:

I was with these two other people one of whom I clashed with really strongly and she clashed with me … we were just at loggerheads. We were both at a loss as to how to deal with each other … we just seemed to be in some sort of power struggle about how we were going to approach this. (Richard, interview transcript, 11 September 2007)

He felt that that the group did achieve the techni-cal learning objectives of the task. He notes, however, that his group ‘got the added delight of learning how to work with people who you don’t have an affinity with’. Although there was fric-tion, Richard was keen to point out that they did manage to work together and that in the end ‘it was okay’. He notes that there is something about the materiality of making things in sculp-ture and the fact that there are studio areas that need to be shared that fosters interaction and a degree of giving and sharing. His reflection below demonstrates how collaborative learning can foster a climate of respect and enhance learning:

It helped understand what was important to those people and what they value which means you can be more sympathetic to what they are trying to do when you see their work in other projects. (Richard, interview transcript, 11 September 2007)

The climate of respect for others is also estab-lished through other learning activities such as the ‘Feedback Method’, which involves students putting their work on display for class critique.

The group is encouraged to approach this process in a respectful and collegial way by offering other possibilities to the artist’s work. The creator of the work is deliberately not part of the discussion. As Peter explains:

The emphasis is taken off the artist; the artist is witness, and is not asked to justify or defend their works. This gets rid of intentionality. It’s much more about reading what’s actually there. Every-one else is in a sense giving the gift of feedback and so they are talking about the work and responding and trying to interpret the work. (Peter, interview transcript, 30 October 2007)

Further to this, Peter notes that the artist’s role is to listen and take notes on what is being said to hear if there is anything they can engage with. Focusing on interpersonal intelligence helps students to understand a range of creative processes and fosters an environment where creativity can thrive. Loi & Dillon (2006) believe that creative spaces are as much about the rela-tionships that are formed between people as they are about the physical environment.

122



A critical incident and artistry in teachingIn this section we would like to focus on one particular classroom event because we believe this event holds a useful lesson about both artistry and humanity in teaching. The event was between Felix and Peter during the Welded Sheet Metal project (see Figures 6 and 7). Felix wanted to

surpass the requirements and approach it in a slightly different way but found that that was not appropriate … we found a better … way to do it, but the teacher wasn’t happy with that and didn’t seem to want to explain why. So I felt quite frus-trated. (Felix, interview transcript, 20 September 2007)

It seems there was a classroom event that produced a clash in values about the creative process. In short, Felix wanted to experiment in a way that Peter thought was not appropriate for the task at hand. Angela later ascertained that Peter’s reluctance to let Felix experiment was because this would have resulted in a decora-tive rather than accurate reading of the surface of the body. Felix understood that there were some technical skills to be gained from this learning activity, but he felt that these technical skills were not new to him. He felt ‘very strongly’ at the time that his method would potentially produce a more successful result. Felix felt that this incident hindered his learning because of the ‘sense of frustration’. He reflects, however, that ‘the task and its aims were not clear’ to him.

Being told that he couldn’t experiment in an art class challenged Felix’s values and expecta-tions. Peter’s expectations, too, were thwarted. He noted in Felix’s summative assessment report that Felix’s folio was ‘not the independent and self-driven journal or folio I could have rightly expected from you’ (Felix’s summative assess-ment report, June 2007).

From an educational perspective it is useful to reflect upon how powerfully values influence behaviour. Values can subtly change depending on the circumstances. We can seemingly hold conflicting values because they are never de-contextualised. For example, although Peter

values experimentation he was not focused on that aspect of the creative process in this exer-cise. This truth about conflicting values can sometimes create confusion and frustration for students and lecturers alike.

If we aim to engage in what Eisner (2002, 49) calls ‘good educational criticism’, then our attempts to make meaning of this event should illuminate what is happening to enhance artistry in teaching. Insight comes when we consider how subtle shifts in power relations regarding subject mastery can lead to a loss of personal authority, which in turn can lead to a sense of powerlessness. Felix felt that a more satisfac-tory experience would have been to receive ‘some kind of reassurance’ that there would be room for experimentation later in the semester.

Effective teaching is a complex social system that relies on the quality of relationships. Schmier (1995, 20) writes about how critically reflecting on his teaching practice has helped him change the image of himself. He now sees the students as his profession and no longer chases the ‘golden fleece of subject mastery’. There is no doubt that Peter is an effective educator, his curriculum is sound and the learn-ing activities are purposeful. What may be gleaned from this event is a subtle reflection upon artistry in teaching, whereby the student simply needed more reassurance than might be ordinarily considered. This can be so easily over-looked in the exhausting nature of studio teach-ing with all its pressures and deadlines. Peter knows that students need reassurance; he spoke at length about this during our interviews:

If you see someone who is ex tremely distressed, the first thing you have to do is support them, encourage them to go on … whether you spend the afternoon sharpening pencils or whether you use another method of dealing with the problem. (Peter, interview transcript, 30 October 2008)

Peter can see the creative path so clearly because he is a professional artist and an experienced lecturer. It is perhaps sometimes easy to forget that students are often in the

123



dark and although they have flashes of light there is a great deal of energy expended on being confused, trying to understand and having their long-held values challenged. For example, Anna also had ‘lots of moments of despair’ but she felt that ‘the moments where she (I) had clarification were inspiring and empowering’. Often she did not understand a project until she was half way through the next project and was able to reflect upon it from a distance. When this started to happen she felt that it was a ‘light-globe’ moment:

That’s why just kind of going along and not stressing too much about not understanding because you probably will work it out in the end. Sometimes you’ve just got to keep going and it will come. Most of the time I’m okay with that but sometimes I’m not … to be open minded and ready for things to just happen and ready to fail. (Anna, interview transcript, 6 September 2007)

It takes time to value the complexities and diffi-culties of the learning process, and it is partic-ularly hard to see making mistakes as a valua-ble part of that process. If educators want students to value the things they value, they need to acknowledge the time it takes for students to learn, to trust their teachers and to value the difficult nature of the learning process. Trust is an important component of changing our own and other people’s minds about the things that matter to us (Gardner, 2004). Schmier (1995, 22) says: ‘I do not believe that there is anything more powerful in the classroom than a bond of trust, an honest interaction among everyone in that class-room.’

If educators maintain high expectations without any attachment to how students embrace those expectations, then it may be possible to meet students at their individual point of emotional and intellectual growth. There has to be an acknowledgement, however, that this is extremely difficult to achieve. Taking a benign attitude to error in a culture where error is considered failure is a

psychological challenge that requires a great deal of energy, patience and good will on behalf of both lecturers and students.

Artistry in teaching mirrors the creative process in that lecturers are constantly making choices in relation to their students and their curriculum and sometimes their choices are in error. Artistry in teaching is a high ideal. It requires that lecturers manage their own and their students’ anxieties about error and not meeting their own and others’ high expecta-tions.

Research narrative insightsPeter’s pedagogical approach provides an opportunity for students to experience shifts in perception by bringing the artistic process to the surface. It is guided by adult learning princi-ples that align to Mezirow’s (1975) theory of transformative learning. For example, of the four student participants in this study, Hannah, Rich-ard and Anna reported that they struggled with various elements of the Body and Space subject. However, they recognised that this struggle was about becoming aware of their assumptions in a critical way which ultimately helped them to transform their world view. Peter believes his role in the studio is to devise perceptual learning activities that draw upon the student’s own interests in both individual and collaborative ways. Hannah, Richard and Anna recognised their peers as ‘colleagues’ and all believed that the collaborative work helped to establish trust amongst the group which, in turn, made them more open to experimentation, risk taking, play-fulness and the giving and receiving of construc-tive critique. They all recognised and articulated these elements as critical to their conception of creativity. The students openly discussed the difficulties they had with collaborative learning, but concluded that it could not have been any other way and that it provided added learning opportunities. It is interesting to note, however, that Anna’s conception of good collaboration was defined by a lack of conflict; that Richard’s learning about collaboration was seen as an ‘added bonus’ rather than a core component of the learning process. Both these conceptions of

124



the purpose of collaborative learning in this subject suggest that the learning objectives and assessment tasks in this area of the curriculum are underdeveloped, particularly given Peter’s sound philosophical reasons for fostering collaborative learning.

Hannah, Richard and Anna were initially chal-lenged by this subject. However, they eventually came to value uncertainty as an uncomfortable but necessary part of the learning process. The learning activities provided them with multiple points of entry into the creative process. They were encouraged to engage their multiple intel-ligences and, as a result, did indeed develop their creativity.

In terms of both the lived experience articu-lated in their stories and validated by the litera-ture, these student/lecturer interactions were successful and meaningful learning and teach-ing experiences that produced the desired outcome: transformative learning at the appro-priate level for first year. The student–lecturer dynamic in these cases was very successful because all participants responded in ways that met the expectations of the other.

However, what happens when students do not respond in the ways that lecturers expect, or do not value the same things as their lecturers? Suddenly, questions about engagement and motivation arise. For example, Felix did not meet Peter’s expectations of appropriate student atti-tudes. So what can educators ‘rightly expect’ of their students? When considering this question we are guided by Schmier (1995, 21), who believes ‘the need to value effort as well as abil-ity and to develop attitude as well as talent is obvious’. Schmier goes on to explain that he values disciplinary knowing whilst acknowledg-ing that

Deep hurt, self denigration, and emptiness hinder sincere and honest effort and ultimately impact on performance, just as self-confidence, self-worth, pride, integrity, pursuit of excellence, and humility bring out the willingness to work hard and accept challenge and develop the student’s innate ability. (Schmier 1995, 21)

It is for this reason, perhaps, that educators can maybe accept rather than expect that students may not always like the things they ask them to do; that their capacity and readiness for learning at any point in time is dependent upon how will-ing and able they are to examine their own values, especially as ‘each student stands at a different point on both the emotional and intel-lectual growth continuum’ (Schmier 1995, 22).

ConclusionIn this article we have discussed a particular pedagogical approach within a fine art context that we believe is ontological in nature because it develops the whole person. We have analysed the curriculum in the light of Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence theory and examined how it embod-ies a plurality of intellect to stimulate learning and foster creativity. We have also explored the complexities of the student–lecturer relation-ship, how this mirrors the creative process and requires an educational kind of artistry.

Based on our experiences and findings, we recommend that educators who are concerned with fostering creativity are encouraged by their institutions to engage in educational research that seeks to define their creative pedagogies in similar studies to this one but that future studies should focus more explicitly on assessment criteria and practices. This will provide a focus on how educators measure the quality of student work so they may better understand the consequences of their teaching approaches. Future studies might also broaden the range of student participants to include all year levels within a degree programme and design learning interventions that explicitly allow students to be cognisant of developing their multiple intelli-gences to inform their creative development. This may produce a more holistic picture of an integrated curriculum design.

Educators need creative opportunities to articulate educational values and ethical frame-works with peers and wider community networks to find overlaps, synergies and a shared sense of purpose. Institutions, too, need to consider the values and ethical frameworks that govern their cultures so they may collec-

125



tively and creatively envision themselves into a rapidly changing future. Paradoxically this requires wise and creative leadership that understands the slow and difficult nature of fostering creativity.

Angela Clarke is a Senior Advisor Learning and Teaching in the College of Design and Social Context at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia. She has accumulated almost 20 years’ experience as an educator and is committed to excellence in tertiary teaching. Angela is known for her expertise in creative arts education and provides learning and teaching leadership amongst academics in creative disciplines. Her background is in drama and theatre education where she has written and directed original plays. She currently leads a four-piece music ensemble as a singer/songwriter. Angela’s research interests include creativity education, embodied cognition, multiple intelligences, conceptions and principles of learning and teaching, academic development, peer learning and educational leadership and management. Contact address: Design and Social Context, RMIT University, GPO Box 2476, Melbourne, Vic 3001, Australia. Email: [email protected]

Peter Cripps is an artist and educator. In his early career he worked in Australian museums, galleries and the related art industry as a curator and director for 15 years. He has been exhibiting for the past 38 years and has had 33 individual exhibitions from 1976 to 2011 at private and public galleries, including the Art Gallery of New South Wales, National Gallery of Victoria. Since 1989 Peter Cripps has taught sculpture in the School of Art at RMIT University, Melbourne. Research into spatial teaching is an ongoing area of investigation with a focus on the concep-tualisation of space by artists with regard to the physical, psychological and perceptual produc-tion of space. Contact address: School of Art, RMIT University, GPO Box 2476, Melbourne, Vic 3001, Australia. Email: [email protected]

ReferencesBarone, T. & Eisner, E. (1997) Arts-based educational research, in R. Jaeger [Ed.] Complementary Methods for Research in Education. Washington DC: American Educational Research Association, pp. 73–94

Biggs, J. & Tang, C. (2007) Teaching for Quality Learning at University, 3rd edn. Buckingham: SRHE & Open University Press

Clarke, A. & Budge, K. (2010) Listening for creative voices amid the cacophony of fiscal complaint about art and design education, International Journal of Art & Design Education, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 153–62

Connelly, F.M. & Clandinin, D. J. (1990) Stories of experience and narrative inquiry, Educational Researcher, Vol. 19, No. 5, pp. 2–14

Dall’Alba, G. & Barnacle, R. (2007) An ontological turn for higher education, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 32, No. 6, pp. 679–92

Eisner, E. (2002) The Arts and the Creation of Mind. London: Yale University Press

Fontana, A. & Frey, J. H. (2005) The interview: From neutral stance to political involvement, in N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln [Eds] The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 695–727

Gardner, H. (1983, 1993) Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books. Second edn published in Britain by Fontana Press

Gardner, H. (2004) Changing Minds: The Art and Science of Changing Our Own and Other People’s Minds. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press

Gardner, H. (2007) Five Minds for the Future. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press

Garrison, D. R. & Vaughan, N. D. (2008) Blended Learning in Higher Education: Frameworks, Principles & Guidelines. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

126



Gummesson, E. (1991) Qualitative Methods in Management Research. Newbury Park: Sage

Hetland, L., Winner, E., Veenema, S. & Sheridan, K. (2007) Studio Thinking: The Real Benefits of Visual Arts Education. New York and London: Teachers College Press

Loi, D. & Dillon, P. (2006) Adaptive educational environments as creative spaces, Cambridge Journal of Education, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 363–81

Mezirow, J. (1975) Education for Perspective Transformation: Women’s Reentry Programs in Community Colleges. New York: Centre for Adult Education, Teachers College, Columbia University

Schmier, L. (1995) Random Thoughts: The Humanity of Teaching. Madison, WI: Magna Publications, Inc.

Shreeve, A., Sims, E.,& Trowler, P. (2010) ‘A kind of exchange’: learning from art and design teaching, Higher Education Research & Development, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 125–38

Sieber, J. (1993) The ethics and politics of sensitive research, in C. Renzetti, C. Lee & R. Lee [Eds] Researching Sensitive Topics. London: Sage

Stake, R. E. (2000) Case studies, in N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln [Eds] Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 435–54

fostering creativity: a multiple intelligences approach to designing learning in undergraduate fine...

Documents